If We Protestants Truly Hated Catholics...

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Protestant Reformation is a historical fact. So I am certainly not twisting history, while the Catholic Church has been twisting Scripture for ages. I just feel sorry for the Catholics who continue to believe the lies coming from the Vatican. There should have been a mass exodus from Babylon.

Ok....Who said the Reformation wasn't a fact??? o_O

Hmmmmm......Protestant denominations don't agree with each other on everything but they agree with the Catholic Church on some things.

Soooooo wouldn't that mean that the Protestant denominations are telling lies also??? According to your above stated theory any doctrine the Protestant denominations teach to their members that AGREE with the Catholic Church means they are also teaching their members a lie also....right????

Soooo based on your theory there should have been a mass exodus from Protestantism also and you should feel sorry for your Protestant friends (and for yourself) who continue to believe the lie's their church leaders are teaching them which are the same lies that are being taught to the Catholics.;)

Mary

*peaks around corner with a huge smile on face*

Gasp! DID SOMEONE SAY REFORMATION!!!!!
:) :) :) :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Enoch111

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mary Mary Mary, quite contrary.
We are all at different levels in our walk with Christ
The one to listen to is the one walking in the Holy Spirit, and that could be anyone.
But you have to recognize the Spirit in that person before you will know for sure.
How about you Mary?
Do you recognize the Spirit of God when he is before you?
How do you know?
I know the question is difficult and you are having trouble coming up with a logical answer without destroying you unbiblical theory HOWEVER I will ask one more time:

How is it that men from different denominations using THE SAME SCRIPTURE for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training all come up with a different interpretation of that scripture??? Which denomination do you choose as the one who is going to teach, rebuke, correct and train you Rollow Tamasi???
 

Rollo Tamasi

Well-Known Member
Aug 28, 2017
2,317
1,512
113
73
Inverness, Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I know the question is difficult and you are having trouble coming up with a logical answer without destroying you unbiblical theory HOWEVER I will ask one more time:

How is it that men from different denominations using THE SAME SCRIPTURE for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training all come up with a different interpretation of that scripture??? Which denomination do you choose as the one who is going to teach, rebuke, correct and train you Rollow Tamasi???
My answer is quite clear Mary.
You don't understand the answer.
I don't look to a denomination for answers.
I listen to God's people and the wisdom he has given each of us.
You don't understand, do you Mary?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009 and Nancy

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I am going to make an observation B. about the Bible that I have been enlightened about in regards the numerical books of the Bible.

There are two stacks of 6 loaves on the table of shewbread, which represents God's word, taken together. 6-6.
Across from the table of shew bread is the candlestick when all the flowers, knops etc added up. 66.
The book of Isaiah, being the mini bible, from creation to redemption and new heavens and earth, are chapters. 66
The number of man is 6.
The OT itself, the standard of judgment is the limit of the law, meaning, 40 stripes save 1. 39.
The NT is a litte more interesting, in that there are 4 gospels, corresponding to the 4 living creatures of Revelation, 7 letters to 7 churches by Paul as like in Revelation, etc and it also ties into the Sanctuary. The 4 gospels in the altar of Sacrifice, the book of Acts the Laver of Baptism, the letters to the churches and epistles the life in the Holy Place (bread (word), incense (prayer), light (share)), and Revelation ending in the Most Holy Place. It also is 3 to the 3rd power (3x3x3). 27.

Please do not blame Luther for everything. It is historically unrealistic and it would be a gross historical error (consider also Miles Coverdale, 1537 and also the Geneva 1560 and 1611 of James I (between the testaments (translated by the 2nd Cambridge Company of 7 men (John Duport, William Branthwaite, Jeremiah Radcliffe, Samuel Ward, Andrew Downes, John Bois, Robert Ward)) with notation that it was not scripture, but for historical use (and many simply had their copy rebound and removed the apocrypha altogether))), and also an oversimplification of why the apocrypha (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 1 Maccabees, Wisdom (Sirach), Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, * Esther (added "God" throughout, Mordecai's dream, Haman's letter, Esther's "God" prayer, etc) & * Daniel (additional portions, as in Daniel many more lines in chap. 3, 'prayer/song of Azariah', and chap. 13 (Susanna) and 14 (Bel & the Dragon).)) ceased to be included as part of a volume that Christians read, under normal circumstances. (I have read them all and then some.)

"The apocryphal books were not admitted into the canon of Scripture during the first four centuries of the Christian church. They are not mentioned in the catalogue of inspired writings made by Melito, bishop of Sardis, who flourished in the second century, nor in those of Origen, in the third century, of Athanasius, Hilary, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Gregory Nazianzen, Amphilochius, Jerome, Rufinus, and others of the fourth century; nor in the catalogue of canonical books recognized by the Council of Laodicea, held in the same century, whose canons were received by the Catholic Church; so that, as Bishop Burnet well observes, "we have the concurring sense of the whole church of God in this matter." To this decisive evidence against the canonical authority of the apocryphal books, we may add that they were never read in the Christian church until the fourth century, when, as Jerome informs us, they were read "for example of life and instruction of manners, but were not applied to establish any doctrine;" and contemporary writers state that although they were not approved as canonical or inspired writings, yet some of them, particularly Judith, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus, were allowed to be perused by catechumens. As proof that they were not regarded as canonical in the fifth century, Augustine relates that when the book of Wisdom was publicly read in the church, it was given to the readers or inferior ecclesiastical officers, who read it in a lower place than those books which were universally acknowledged to be canonical, which were read by the bishops and presbyters in a more eminent and conspicuous manner. To conclude: Notwithstanding the veneration in which these books were held by the Western Church, it is evident that the same authority was never ascribed to them as to the Old and New Testament; until the last Council of Trent, at its fourth session, presumed to place them all (excepting the prayer of Manasseh and the third and fourth books of Esdras) in the same rank with the inspired writings of Moses and the prophets." - An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. by Thomas Hartwell Horne, B.D. of Saint John's College, Cambridge; rector of the United Parishes of Saint Edmund the King and Martyr and Saint Nicholas Acons, Lombard Street; Prebendary of Saint Paul's; New Edition, from the Eighth London Edition, Corrected and Enlarged. Illustrated with numerous maps and fac-similies of Bilical Manuscripts. Volume I. Philadelphia: Published by J. Whetham & Son, 144 Chestnut Street. Stereotyped by L. Johnson. 1841.; page 426 (left column) - https://archive.org/stream/anintroductiont07horngoog#page/n459/mode/1up

http://www.biblelight.net/hebrew-canon.htm

Apocrypha, and the reasons they are not accepted as "canon":

"... 1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone (a little Syriac/Chaldee in Daniel, etc.) used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.

2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.

3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.

4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.

5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.

6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead...

7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. ..." - Sam Gipp - https://samgipp.com/answerbook/?page=34.htm
Thank you for that extremely verbose, albeit impotent excuse for the Protestant canon.

The fact is that the Deuterocanonical Books which YOU erroneously refer to as "Apocrypha" were included in the OPEN Jewish canon of Scripture in the first century. It can be shown by the 200 or so allusions, references and quotes in the NT that Jesus and the NT writers studied from these Books.

In fact - it wasn't until long after Jesus ascended to Heaven and the destruction of the Temple decades later that these Books were removed from the OPEN Jewish Canon and their canon officially closed. This means that Protestants agree with the POST-Christ, POST-Temple canon of Scripture that was declared by the very people that rejected our Lord.
The Catholic Church adheres to the canon that Jesus and the NT writers were raised on.

As a matter of fact, some of your Protestant Fathers wanted to continue the removing of Books. For example, Luther rejected the Books of James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation. In fact, he referred to James as "the Epistle of Straw" because of its emphasis on works. Had it not been for the urging of his contemporaries like Philip Melanchton - YOUR Protestant Bible would be a LOT thinner . . .

You wanna have an honest conversation about the Canon of Scripture? Then, let's have one.
Can I ask you WHY you adhere to the NT Canon of Scripture?? WHO told you that these Books were inspired??
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Marymog

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
*peaks around corner with a huge smile on face*

Gasp! DID SOMEONE SAY REFORMATION!!!!!
:) :) :) :)
Funny. Augustine was Catholic and made up the basic foundation of your theology.

I hope you realize that Calvinism is based on Catholicism.

Total Depravity comes from his writing on original sin.
Unconditional Election comes from predestination.
Perseverance of the Saints = Grace + works = Salvation

And so, based on the above, we also get:
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
My answer is quite clear Mary.
You don't understand the answer.
I don't look to a denomination for answers.
I listen to God's people and the wisdom he has given each of us.
You don't understand, do you Mary?
Hmmmm.....nothing clear in your answer. You left me with more questions:

Who are God's people that you listen to? How do you decide who has the most wisdom? Is the one with the most wisdom the one who interprets Scripture properly?

Curious Mary
 

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Funny. Augustine was Catholic and made up the basic foundation of your theology.

I hope you realize that Calvinism is based on Catholicism.

Total Depravity comes from his writing on original sin.
Unconditional Election comes from predestination.
Perseverance of the Saints = Grace + works = Salvation

And so, based on the above, we also get:
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace

Yes, Augustine was indeed Catholic. And yes, he did build the general foundation... however, Calvin improved upon and perfected his ideas, such as saying that
grace + works does not = salvation; grace= salvation = works

I have a great respect for Augustine. He indeed was one of the fathers of the Reformation. However, the whole point of the Reformation was that the catholic church was a broken system of self salvation. even saying that it is faith + works still admits that faith in Christ's righteousness is not enough... we must add our own. These are the kinds of ideas that indeed needed changed.
 
Last edited:

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
Yes, Augustine was indeed Catholic. And yes, he did build the general foundation... however, Calvin improved upon and perfected his ideas, such as saying that
grace + works does not = salvation; grace= salvation = works

I have a great respect for Augustine. He indeed was one of the fathers of the Reformation. However, the whole point of the Reformation was that the catholic church was a broken system of self salvation. even saying that it is faith + works still admits that faith in Christ's righteousness is not enough... we must add our own. These are the kinds of ideas that indeed needed changed.
I agree that the CC needed change and that it wouldn't change, thus the reformation. If I remember correctly, Luther did not leave the church, the church left him.

I also agree that Calvin "perfected" Augustine's ideas. As you know, I don't like Calvin's theology; although, I must say, Calvinist preachers are among the best since they DO agree that salvation without works is a dead faith. This is found in perseverance of the saints although I do find that it's been watered down a bit these days since the entire church seems to be in a hyper-grace mode.

As you can imagine, I have no respect for Augustine.
He is the reason catholic families baptize their babies asap...due to original sin.
God did not IMPUTE Adam's sin to us, we suffer from the consequences of that sin.

Why didn't the ECF teach original sin before augustine?
Do we suppose he (500AD) knew more about this than those living immediately after Jesus' death?
Ditto for predestination.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I agree that the CC needed change and that it wouldn't change, thus the reformation. If I remember correctly, Luther did not leave the church, the church left him.

I also agree that Calvin "perfected" Augustine's ideas. As you know, I don't like Calvin's theology; although, I must say, Calvinist preachers are among the best since they DO agree that salvation without works is a dead faith. This is found in perseverance of the saints although I do find that it's been watered down a bit these days since the entire church seems to be in a hyper-grace mode.

As you can imagine, I have no respect for Augustine.
He is the reason catholic families baptize their babies asap...due to original sin.
God did not IMPUTE Adam's sin to us, we suffer from the consequences of that sin.

Why didn't the ECF teach original sin before augustine?
Do we suppose he (500AD) knew more about this than those living immediately after Jesus' death?
Ditto for predestination.

You really need to think about your position on imputation.

If it was not by 'imputation' then who is the one person Jesus died for? He could only die once.

Stranger
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
You really need to think about your position on imputation.

If it was not by 'imputation' then who is the one person Jesus died for? He could only die once.

Stranger
Does God hold us personally responsible for our father's sins?
 

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
As you know, I don't like Calvin's theology; although, I must say, Calvinist preachers are among the best since they DO agree that salvation without works is a dead faith. This is found in perseverance of the saints although I do find that it's been watered down a bit these days since the entire church seems to be in a hyper-grace mode.

I would agree. Although, as you can imagine I am a big fan of Calvin. But, the church today is in a hyper- grace mode. We teach that all you need to do is 'choose Jesus', and then go on living your life the same sinful way as always. Although I do not believe that our works ad anything to our salvation, i would agree that, if you do not have a new want to serve Christ out of gratitude for His gift, your 'faith' is not real. As for Augustine, he merely stood out and set forth truths that had already been stated. The church abroad needed change, and he initiated it.
 

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
I would agree. Although, as you can imagine I am a big fan of Calvin. But, the church today is in a hyper- grace mode. We teach that all you need to do is 'choose Jesus', and then go on living your life the same sinful way as always. Although I do not believe that our works ad anything to our salvation, i would agree that, if you do not have a new want to serve Christ out of gratitude for His gift, your 'faith' is not real. As for Augustine, he merely stood out and set forth truths that had already been stated. The church abroad needed change, and he initiated it.
Agreed. Another name for it is easy believism. Some churches make it very easy so their numbers could increase. I know God won't be too happy about this when judging time comes.
I do admire how Calvinists want to live a holy (separated) life.
I DO believe we still have our free will and I very much dislike unconditional election and I've stated why many times.
But some admiration is also there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Does God hold us personally responsible for our father's sins?
Agreed. Another name for it is easy believism. Some churches make it very easy so their numbers could increase. I know God won't be too happy about this when judging time comes.
I do admire how Calvinists want to live a holy (separated) life.
I DO believe we still have our free will and I very much dislike unconditional election and I've stated why many times.
But some admiration is also there.

I believe in free agency, that is that man has the freedom to operate within God's universe, however the only problem is that we are all born sinners and are therefore, willingly or unwillingly, serving our father the devil. That is, until Christ changes our hearts.
 

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
I believe in free agency, that is that man has the freedom to operate within God's universe, however the only problem is that we are all born sinners and are therefore, willingly or unwillingly, serving our father the devil. That is, until Christ changes our hearts.
Of course your last sentence is right.
There is now no condemnation for those who love the Lord.
Those who do not are already condemned because we're born dead in spirit.

As to freedom, I can't get into this now, it's midnight here.
But if you're a pure Calvinist you believe that you have free will, but of course it's based on what God wants and God makes you want to want what HIS will is.

Not the right thread, anyway.
 

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
...The fact is that the Deuterocanonical Books which YOU erroneously refer to as "Apocrypha" were included in the OPEN Jewish canon of Scripture in the first century. It can be shown by the 200 or so allusions, references and quotes in the NT that Jesus and the NT writers studied from these Books....
I have already seen your list, and know it ain't so.

Go ahead. Give me your 10 best. Then we'll see how real your list is. Go on. I'm waiting.
 

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
... For example, Luther rejected the Books of James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation. In fact, he referred to James as "the Epistle of Straw" because of its emphasis on works. ...
You refer to early Luther (1522, his 95 thesis was only in 1517), not later and more mature Luther, and thus you are not honest with historical accuracy, and there's even his own testimony on how he through study and prayer reconciled James and Paul, taking back up his own professors/doctor's cap, which he offered to anyone who could reconcile the two (he did so himself).

"... Luther’s great biographer Roland Bainton pointed out, “Once Luther remarked that he would give his doctor’s beret to anyone who could reconcile James and Paul. Yet he did not venture to reject James from the canon of Scripture, and on occasion earned his own beret by effecting reconciliation. ‘Faith,’ he wrote, ‘is a living, restless thing. It cannot be inoperative. We are not saved by works; but if there be no works, there must be something amiss with faith’ ” [Here I Stand, page 331]. ..." - https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet...--A-Life-Of-Martin-Luther#page/n327/mode/1up/

Luther reject Revelation? He wrote a whole tract on the Whore of Babylon! Go back and read Luther's Table Talk and other more mature works. He accepted all the books, and all the books are in Luther's German Bible.

You speak half-truths and hide what doesn't work for you. I despise that kind of thing, which makes the religion you profess that much more detestable in my sight, from when I first left it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy and brakelite